Regardless of whether Jesus was martyred in 30 C.E. or 33 C.E. or 36 C.E., all in all, the Jews were living in a very unsatisfactory state in those years, not only by the rotten temple priests and the Herod family, but even worse by the brutal and ferocious governor Pilate of the alien Romans.

Pilate in the New Testament is not bad, and seems to be unwilling to put Jesus to death, whose death was solely the responsibility of the Jews. In any case, just looking at the Bible, the Jews are the archetypal villains, and the Roman Pilate appears to be "innocent."

But is that the case? As we all know, the New Testament was written almost 100 years after the martyrdom of Jesus. At that time, in order to cater to the Roman rulers, the Roman masters must be whitewashed. Moreover, the New Testament was later revised several times to abridged passages that were unfavorable to the divinity of Jesus and unfavorable to the Roman rulers.

All in all, there are too many inconsistencies and omissions in the New Testament, and many things are specious and confusing. Pilate in history was not a good man, and his sins against the Jews and Jesus could not be washed clean.

For example, when Pilate first took office, he did this thing: he ordered his army to march into Jerusalem with shields with portraits of Roman emperors, which was obviously a show of power to give the Jews a disgrace (the Jewish tradition forbids idolatry, and the portrait of the Roman emperor is certainly not suitable for Jerusalem).

In the face of this newly appointed two hundred and five governors, even the Romans' dogleg Herod. Antipas was speechless, and could only lead the delegation to Pilate himself, begging the governor to remove the portraits.

In the face of Jewish protests. How did Pilate do it? He sent his guards out. Prepare to arrest people. But what he didn't expect was that. The Jews also let go, and the delegates simply lay on the ground and showed their necks, meaning either you kill us or remove the portraits.

Faced with a backlash from the Jews, the governor had to compromise and remove the portrait. But the matter was not over, the friction between the Jews and the new governor had only just begun, after he officially took office. This Pilate went around suppressing the Jewish rebels and went on a killing spree in Galilee, mixing "the blood of the Galileans with their sacrifices."

All in all, the governor had a bad reputation among the Jews, in Jewish terms "corrupt for bribe, violence, stealing, assault, abuse of power, mass executions of dissenters, and brutality." Even the Banu Herod said he was vindictive and hot-tempered.

You must know that Pilate represents Rome and is the representative of Rome who appointed to rule Israel, and the Herod family, as a son, commented on Lao Tzu's representative, which shows how bad Pilate was.

Pilate's years as governor can be said to have been in a very bad state of Jewish life, and there were more and more rebels like Jesus and John. The entire Jewish community is in turmoil.

So when was Pilate governor of Judea? It was about 26 A.D. to 36 A.D. Well, you must have noticed the vintage. Pilate was ousted in 36 C.E. for the simple reason that a Samaritan "prophet" had dealt him a heavy blow.

This Samaritan prophet proclaimed to the Jews that he had been beaten by Moses and demanded that the Jews accept his leadership. Pilate reacted immediately by sending cavalry to kill the Samaritan prophet and his followers.

This action seemed to preserve the authority and rule of Rome, but it angered the Samaritans, who accused it of cruelty, and for a time the public was outraged. Let's put it this way, Pilate's iron fist did not bring the Jews to their knees, but drove them to the brink of open rebellion. So much so that the Roman governor in Syria had to intervene himself, deposing Pilate and sending the goods back to Rome.

The initiative was so popular with the Jews that the group almost made the Syrian governor a savior.

It was in this context that São Paulo made his transformation, and while it is impossible for anyone to know the true reasons for his transformation, we can make bold guesses. As mentioned earlier that Paul was a Pharisee, how could a Pharisee who followed Jewish law embark on the path of total negation and overthrow of Jewish law? I am afraid there was only one reason, and that was Paul's utter disillusionment with Jewish law and tradition. He feared that adherence to tradition could no longer change the conditions of Jewish existence.

Look at the reaction of the Jews to Pilate, when Jesus was executed, the Jewish upper echelons almost unanimously shouted and shouted to kill, but when faced with Pilate, they were completely powerless, and they could only rely on the mercy of Papa Rome. The Jews were grateful to Dade for the Syrian governor who had expelled Pilate, not realizing that it was not a gift, but the duty of the governor, who was not helping the Jews at all, but only maintaining Roman rule.

At that moment, I am afraid that St. Paul's heart was torn apart fiercely, and the reaction of his compatriots was probably to make him feel humiliated, and also to make him realize that Jewish law and the Jewish temple were really useless. Since they are useless, what else do you want them to do?

So what effect did Paul's enlightenment have for Li Xiaofeng? Judging from the experience of later generations of China, it seems that communism is indeed useless in improving the national economy and people's livelihood, and the rise of China is the role of pure capital. Does that mean that the Soviet Union should follow Paul's example of throwing away the rules and regulations of communism? Just learn from Huaxia to sell dog meat on the head of a sheep, or simply don't even ask for this skin, and take the capitalist road gorgeously.

This is a very serious issue, and it is very likely that the sky will fall apart, and the basic plate of the Soviet Union was easily put together by people in Lenin's area. It is a pity that it was not destroyed in the hands of the enemy, but in the hands of one's own people.

Moreover, in Li Xiaofeng's view, there is no benefit at all in completely negating the original line and road, and the experience of the Soviet Union in the past 20 years shows that the original road is still useful in some cases, at least helping the Soviet Union to complete part of the original accumulation. If you deny it now, the common people will not necessarily buy it.

How to complete the reform on the basis of unwavering itself is a matter of learning. So is there any relevant experience in history that can be learned? The utilitarian attitude that no matter whether a white cat or a black cat catches a mouse is a good cat, there must be something problematic, saying that both material and spiritual hands must be hard. In fact, everything is about the money. The result was a shake to the party's foundations. When problems are discovered, we should pay attention to ideological construction. At most, it can be regarded as a remedy, and as for whether it is too late, only time will tell.

Some comrades may want to say, but it is not enough to grasp ideological construction from the very beginning. The problem is not so simple, even after the reform of China, the ideological construction is talked about every year, and the mouth cannon has not stopped, but under the impact of capital, what is the effect?

There are always a few saints in this world, when faced with temptation. How many people are not tempted? It is too naïve to say that the mouth cannon of ideological construction is useless, and it is too naïve to rely on just a few empty words to make the majority of party members and cadres resist sugar-coated shells. How many Hai Rui have been born in human history?

There are also comrades who say that system building depends on the system to restrain it. The idea is not bad, but the problem is that the system is not a cure-all, and there is no perfect system in this world, as long as it is the rules of the game formulated by human beings, loopholes can always be found. What's more, the system is always implemented by people.

There is no one who can implement the system, and no matter how good the system is, it is the so-called democracy of the three fat families. The so-called human rights of the third brother's family. So is there a solution to the problem? Let's look at the lessons of history.

The Reformation in St. Paul succeeded, and Christianity spread throughout the Roman Empire with its incredible inclusiveness. From the original heretical cult to the state religion that dominates the world. It should be said that this was probably not even thought of by São Paulo himself.

So what is the key to the success of Christianity? To tell the truth, the teachings of this religion are flawed. What hard wounds? It is the position of Jesus.

According to St. Paul, Jesus is the "Son of Man" (i.e., the Son of God), and the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are Trinity. Judging from the practice of mainstream Christian denominations since then, they have been trying to strengthen the divinity of Jesus and erase all evidence that Jesus is a human being.

But the coming of Jesus is really a bit inexplicable, and if he is the savior, then he should save the world, at least the Jews, who were living a miserable life at that time. However, we don't see that. The life of the Jews before and after the birth and martyrdom of Jesus did not improve significantly, but deteriorated dramatically.

According to Christianity, this time Jesus came to cleanse sins, that is, to send a signal to the world to serve Him, and only by serving Him can they be freed from sin and enter Heaven through the final judgment at His Second Coming.

Truth be told, it's a bit of a cover-up. According to the Jewish Old Testament, the coming of the Messiah was the beginning of the Last Judgment. If Jesus is the Messiah, then when He first comes, the end of the world will come, the dead will be resurrected, and then they will be judged one by one, and those who have no sin will go to heaven and hell instead (yes, many comrades think that according to the doctrine of the three monotheistic religions, people will go to heaven or hell when they die, which is not right. The orthodox saying is that people cannot go to heaven or hell when they die. Only when the Apocalypse comes and the Last Judgment begins, when all the dead will be resurrected and then judged, will it be decided where you will ultimately go. ）。

Obviously, Jesus did not fulfill all this, and the writers of the New Testament had to give a reasonable explanation for this, otherwise they would not be able to justify themselves. And the statement they give is that Jesus came this time to help the world wash away sins, that is, to give the big guy a chance, as long as they believe in Christ and be good, the end will come and they can pass the judgment and go to heaven.

Then St. Paul and the other disciples of Christ also told the world that when Jesus came a second time, it would be the end of the world, so don't hesitate to draw closer to the Lord so that you can be saved.

Judging from the doctrine of Christianity, God and his old man were so merciful that he always wanted to give mankind a chance, and when the flood destroyed the world, he informed the righteous Noah. This time, he sent his son to walk in the world again, to warn again, and to give him another chance.

However, this explanation is really far-fetched. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are Trinity, and the Son is the Father, that is to say, God Himself came to earth to give mankind the gospel and revelation. But one has to ask, as for such trouble? Why did the Father become the Son and go through this journey? The Almighty Father may just snap his fingers to cleanse mankind of sins, or it would be nice to have another vision to scare and scare like the last flood, which is much better than the crucifixion of Jesus.

So in the early days of Christianity. There is controversy about the divinity of Jesus. There are many sects that believe that Jesus did not possess a divine nature. According to the theories of these sects. Jesus is a prophet and a spokesman for the Father. In this way, the character is much more reasonable in combination with his martyrdom.

For example, ****** religion actually honors Jesus as a prophet, on the same level as Muhammad. In Muhammad's own words, Jesus and he were prophets, both of whom came to deliver the gospel and salvation in the place of God (or Allah).

From an objective point of view, Muhammad's strategy was even more clever, and he took a step back and did not say that he was the son of God or any savior. Because this cowhide is easy to debunk. Christianity had already played a trick of second coming, and it would be much less effective for him to come again.

He simply declared that he had no divinity, no miracles or magic, and that he was merely a messenger of God. Of course, he wisely kicked Jesus off the altar and put him on a par with himself, and declared that he Muhammad was the last and most powerful prophet sent by God, and that there would be no new prophet to enlighten mankind if they were not enlightened.

Doctrinally speaking, there is nothing new about ****** religion, and the basic framework is still the same as that inherited from Judaism and Christianity. Muhammad, however, succeeded in filling the old bottles with new wine. And judging from the later development of ****** religion. Muhammad was as successful as St. Paul's conversion of Judaism.

Not beat around the bush. Li Xiaofeng also wanted to complete a similar revamp of the Soviet Union, reinvigorating it with a new wine while keeping the old bottles.

So what kind of wine does Li Xiaofeng want to be a new wine? Economically speaking, it means shaking off the shackles of the planned economy and strengthening the role of the market. Politically speaking, we should get rid of the shackles of ******** and use more rational means to handle international relations.

Let's start with the former, it is indeed difficult to get rid of the planned economic system that has been in place for more than a decade, especially when the system has not yet shown obvious problems, and this will certainly not make the vested interests happy.

The vested interests of the planned economy were in fact the privileged class of the Soviet Union, which included a considerable number of old revolutionaries and essentialists like Susnov. They stick to old dogmas and do not want or see the need for change.

This group of privileged classes was still quite numerous in the Soviet Union, specifically including the big privileged class and the small privileged class, and the big privileged class was naturally those high-ranking old revolutionaries, such as high-ranking cadres of the rank of members of the Central Committee. Because of the unique distribution system of the Soviet Union, they were able to enjoy gorgeous supranational treatment.

While ordinary Soviet citizens were struggling with barely enough housing, bicycles, and basic necessities, they had gorgeous villas, fancy cars, and the living conditions of big capitalists. And the privileges of this group of people are carried over to their next generation. The second generation of red can rely on the support of their father and brother to achieve success easily (for example, Mikoyan is a typical example, without his bureau brother, he can mix so well?) ）。 And such a "tradition" inherited from father to son hinders the promotion of other "poor families", and the Soviet Union, which fought for its father, will lose its vitality and will become a backwater.

What Li Xiaofeng has to do is to change this situation, and to be honest, it is difficult. Or that there is basically no particularly good way. Or, like Stalin, just take all the old revolutionaries and old lackeys down and replace them with a new batch of people. This method is simple and direct, the reason why the second generation of red is the second generation of red, the privilege is so special, the root is in power, without power, this is a fart.

The old revolution is dead, and it is probably impossible for its descendants to inherit their father's business. But this will not solve the fundamental problem, and can only be regarded as the eradication of the old privileged class, and the new privileged class will probably be born soon. So we can see that in the last years of his life, Stalin suddenly attacked the loyal lackeys and brought down the lackeys, including Kaganovich and Monotov. Obviously, this is the solution that Stalin came up with for the privilege, to prepare to empty the old man and make room for the newcomer.

Unfortunately, this is a palliative but not a cure. And by the end of Stalin, the privileged classes of the Soviet Union were already so powerful that without Stalin, no one could restrain them. So as soon as someone wants to get in their way, they can band together to get that person out.

Look at Khrushchev's reforms, objectively speaking, the reforms were right (but the methods were problematic), but as soon as Khrushchev touched the interests of the privileged class, the gang united to "retire".

The only good news for Li Xiaofeng is that, because of the existence of Lenin and Trotsky, although the struggle within the party has been fierce in the last two decades, the privileged class has not been as strong as it was in history, and it is slightly easier to deal with.

However, this is not to say that these privileged classes are easy to deal with, referring to the experience of the Jews, how the old privileged classes (the temple priests and the House of Herod) stifled the reforms of John the Baptist and Jesus, as long as there are interests, this is a life-and-death struggle. So how exactly is Li Xiaofeng going to deal with this problem? Let's look down...... (To be continued.) )

PS: Bow and thank you to the ghouls Kiss Mo, Wind and Rain, Brother Fang, Wind and Rain, Akula-class nuclear submarine observers, Wind and Rain, and Comrade Juventus!